Minimally invasive diagnostic and interventional procedure prevalence in US and foreign hospitals continues to increase, as does the demand for certain procedures which involve placement of relatively large devices into targeted locations within tissue structures of criticality. Procedures such as aortic valve replacement conventionally have been addressed with open surgical procedures which are highly invasive. More recently, such procedures have been attempted using natural lumen (i.e., through large blood vessels after an initial surgical transcutaneous or percutaneous access to such vessels) access and delivery systems. Referring to FIG. 1, such systems typically are configured, for example, to reach the aortic valve (12) location inside of the heart (2) from an antegrade approach, which generally requires navigating instrumentation through three of the four chambers of the beating heart (the right atrium 22, left atrium 8, and left ventricle 20, by way of the mitral valve 10 and atrial septum), or from a retrograde approach, which generally requires navigating instrumentation along the aortic arch, from the descending aorta (4) to the ascending aorta (6) and adjacent the aortic valve (12). Each of these approaches presents certain clinical challenges to the surgical team, some of which may be avoided by using what is referred to as a transapical approach, whereby the surgeon creates transcutaneous access to the region around the apex of the heart (26) with a surgical thoracotomy, followed by direct access to the left ventricle (20) using a needle or other device aimed to access the left ventricle (20) around the left ventricular apex (24), which may be followed by one or more dilating instruments to create a temporary access port to the left ventricle. Aspects of a conventional access procedure are illustrated in FIG. 2, wherein a needle device (34) is puncturing the muscular heart wall (30) to gain access to the left ventricle (20) around the location of the left ventricular apex (24). Also shown is a guidewire (36) which may be advanced (38) toward and through the aortic valve (12) to assist with diagnostic and interventional aspects of the procedure. Using these and other instruments such as dilators, this left ventricular access port may be utilized, for example, to replace an aortic valve if bleeding and tissue damage around the access port can be successfully mitigated during such procedure. Subsequent to such a procedure, the instrumentation needs to be removed and the access port closed, usually leaving a prothetic valve or portion thereof behind. The successful closure of a transapical wound on a beating heart of a patient is obviously of high criticality to such a procedure, as is the minimization of loss of blood. Conventional transapical closure techniques typically involve the placement of small sutures to create a purse-string type effect to close the wound as the instrumentation is withdrawn, and it may be very difficult to repeatably create acceptable closures using these techniques without a larger thoracotomy or improved instrumentation. In other words, one of the key challenges to transapical intervention remains transapical wound closure. Indeed, it is believed that transapical access may provide enhanced stability and control during procedures such as aortic valve replacement, due to the fact that the operator may have a relatively direct mechanical connection with the pertinent instrumentation, relative to the connection that he may have using, for example, an antegrade or retrograde vascular approach with more compliant catheter type tools. For this reason, it is even more desirable to successfully address the challenges of transapical access and closure. Further, it would be desirable to have a wound or access closure technology that was applicable not only to transapical access port closure, but also other closure demands pertinent to other surgical interventions of the human body wherein wounds or ports are created, such as in gastrointestinal or gynecological surgery